Intervention Strategies in Change Management (Part 2/2)

The Stages of ISM – Initial Note

The key to successful change management is first the identification of the appropriate problem owners and second the selection of a management methodology to provide the means of handling the transition.

Assuming the ‘players’ have been identified, they must decide on their subsequent course of action. ISM should be selected when the impending or existing change situation exhibits tendencies towards the harder end of the change spectrum, what was termed the ‘flexi’ region of the change spectrum.

The Stages of ISM – Definition Phase

Time spent defining a change event – its nature, impact and repercussions – will pay dividends as the management process develops. Accurately describing the change allows the managing team to adjust membership, assess cultural impacts, examine, through system mapping techniques, relationships, attitudes and causes, and begin to address the change holistically.

The Stages of ISM – Definition Phase

Stage 1: Problem/systems Specification and Description

Management must, through the problem owner(s) and with the assistance of interested parties, develop their understanding of the situation. The change, or problem, must be specified in systems terms and the complexity reduced so as to isolate and determine the systems interactions, relationships and cultures.

It is at this stage that one employs the previously outlined diagramming techniques as a means of assisting definition and analysis. Meetings and interviews will be conducted, experience sought and historical data examined, in an effort to construct an accurate picture of the present system and the likely impact of the changes.

Stage 2: Formulation of Success Criteria

The success criteria associated with a particular change situation may be defined in two ways. The first, and most common, involves the setting of objectives and constraints. The second is merely a corruption of the first in that it generates options, or paths, which are tagged on to the original objective. For analytical and communicative purposes it is always best to produce objectives and constraints.

Options are messy to deal with and have to be broken down at a later stage to determine specific measures of success.

Objectives may be derived from the rationale behind the change and constraints generally emerge from the resources that have been allocated to the task, or more accurately the lack of them. It would be fair to say that the normal constraints facing management in change situations are time and money. Constraints may also be traced to both the nature of the systems and the cultures affected.

Stage 3: Identification of Performance Measures

Having decided what the objectives of the exercise are, it is necessary to formulate appropriate measures for each objective. This should be done at this point to let the problem owner evaluate the options generated subsequently.

Where possible it is best to identify quantifiable measures, such as costs, savings, volume, labour and time. When this is not possible then the measures should be graded in some way, e.g. ranking could be employed. Measures can be entered on the objectives tree, thus providing one descriptive representation of what is to be achieved and how its success will be measured. This provides an ideal focal point for the subsequent evaluation phase and also communicates in a logical fashion the aims of the change.

Stage 4: Generation of Options or Solutions

A wide range of techniques are available to the problem owner(s) which assist in option generation.

Many of the benefits associated with adopting a collective solution methodology will be lost if the groups and teams involved are not operating effectively. Very often, especially when those coming together do not generally function as a work team, it is best to engage in some form of structured team building. This should first break the ice, and second raise the level of performance. Facilitating the learning development process is crucial to the success of group-based approaches.

The participating individuals and groups must see such sessions as being constructive and influential. They should not become cosmetic smoke screens for the tabling of preconceived options. If this happens, those involved may withdraw support and take a more reactive stance. To this end, sensitivity must be shown towards the promoter of even the most ridiculous options.

Stage 5: Selection of Appropriate Evaluation Techniques & Option Editing

Having identified the potential options or solutions, which may of course be presented as ‘strings’ of options rather than discrete solutions, the investigator must then evaluate them.

First, a brief comparative study of the options and the predetermined success criteria will act as an initial screening device. It is important not to alienate those who have contributed suggestions.

Second, a range of evaluation techniques must be selected and applied, for example:

• Examination and manipulation of the previously developed diagrams should assist in determining the impact of the solution option(s) upon the systems environment.
• Physical and computer simulations may assist in determining operational viability – especially in situations where real life experimentation could be ‘costly’.
• Risk, investment, cash flow and cost-benefit analysis should assist in determining the likely return on investment and the projected cash flows.
• Project management techniques, such as network analysis, will test the potential benefits, time scales and resource implications of implementation.
• Environmental impact analysis may be employed to establish the ‘hidden’ environmental cost of adopting particular solutions.
• Strategic and cultural fit must be considered: will proposals match intended strategic outcomes and does the existing culture support the changes?

This initial formal screening should eliminate sub-optimal options, as well as developing an understanding of the interrelationships and order of option paths and linkages. Options need not be standalone activities: they may form paths, courses of activities that must be considered as a group. The analysis within this stage need not be quantitative. Subjective assessments of an option’s suitability may be conducted when there are non-quantifiable performance indicators. Subjective assessments of an option’s suitability are best conducted in an open and participative manner, thus ensuring that accusations of bias and skullduggery are minimized.

Stage 6: Option Evaluation

Options are evaluated against the previously determined change objectives. A tabular format may be used to conduct the evaluation. Objectives, along with their associated performance measures, are entered as a prioritized listing on the left. Individual options and/or option chains are entered along the top. Factual data and/or calculated weightings are entered in the appropriate box corresponding to the option’s performance against a particular objective measure.

The process of option evaluation must be conducted with reference to subsequent implementation. A forward loop is incorporated within the model to emphasize the importance of this factor. This can be formally addressed by ensuring that implementation objectives are built into the original objectives tree, thus resulting in the production of at least subjective measures of success relating to implementation issues.

Stage 7: Development of Implementation Strategies

In this stage, all those affected will recognize the full impact of the change. Only now will the problem owner discover the extent to which a shared perception was reached. In problems with truly ‘hard’ systems there will be little or no resistance. The physical change will go ahead, but as one gravitates towards the ‘softer’ end of the change continuum the risk of latent resistance is always a worrying factor.

To ensure the successful implementation of change via ISM the following key success factors must be adhered to:

• The foundation of effective change management lies in a comprehensive definition of the change situation: ‘act in haste and repent at leisure’.
• Participation of those likely to be affected is crucial.
• Change calls upon a wide range of competencies to be employed. A team-based approach is likely to produce best results, assuming it is ‘facilitated’ by a skilled exponent of change.
• Visible and tangible senior management support is essential.
• An open mind must be kept, effective communication striven for and the change must be ‘marketed’.
• Sensitivity and understanding should be displayed when dealing with those who may feel threatened by the change.
• Failure to provide the resources, development and training required to handle the change will be disastrous. Prepare staff to cope.
• Organizational structures and forward looking strategies which welcome change and see it as an opportunity will greatly enhance the environment for change and thus ease the change agent’s task.

Stage 8: Consolidation

Armed with an implementation strategy designed to maximize the probability of success and acceptance, the agents introduce the change, but we have not yet finished. Old systems and practices just like old habits, die hard. It takes time for a new system or change to be fully accepted. Skillful communication, visual support from above and provision of adequate support to those affected, are required throughout this stage.

Initial changes must be followed up, and both protection and enforcement of the new system will be required. It is up to the problem owners, the agents of the change, to nurture the growth of the new, while encouraging the peaceful demise of the old. Implementation is not the end of the process.

This are the stages in ISM.

Reference:

McCalman, J., Paton, R., & Siebert, S. (2016). Change management: a guide to effective implementation. (4 ed.) SAGE Publications Inc.